Expert Analysis

• Too Often, Use Of K-9 Units Is Cruel And Unusual Punishment

  

  In too many instances, the use of police dogs as weapons violates the Eighth Amendment's protections against cruel and unusual punishment, but as a long line of cases demonstrates, courts have largely failed to acknowledge the unconstitutionality of K-9 unit attacks, says Patrick Buelna at Lawyers for the People.

• Justices' Habeas Ruling Further Saps Writ Of Its Strength

  

  After the U.S. Supreme Court dealt its latest blow to the Great Writ in Jones v. Hendrix, holding that a provision called the “saving clause” cannot be used to file successive habeas petitions after a retroactive change in statutory law, Congress may need to amend the underlying law to ensure a more open habeas process, says Daniel Medwed at Northeastern University.

• Service Members Should Have Right To Unanimous Verdicts

  

  As several recent cases exemplify, service members can be convicted of crimes by nonunanimous juries in military courts and cannot appeal such verdicts, despite Supreme Court precedent from recent years — a glaring constitutional error that Congress should rectify expeditiously, says Kevin Carroll at Hughes Hubbard.

• Jail-Based Polling Places Are Key To Expanding Ballot Access

  

  As the 2024 elections begin to take shape, jurisdictions should consider jail-based polling locations to ease voting obstacles faced by incarcerated people, say former advocacy director Naila Awan and communications strategist Wanda Bertram at Prison Policy Initiative.

• A New HOPE For Expunging State-Level Cannabis Convictions

  

  As states across the U.S. legalize cannabis, individuals with related convictions face hurdles to expunging their records due to outdated record-keeping systems — but the recently introduced HOPE Act would remedy this by providing grant funding to state and local governments, says Rep. Dave Joyce, R-Ohio.

• Immigration Board Must Mend Choice Of Law Post-Garcia

  

  The Board of Immigration Appeals must revisit the choice of law standard recently established in Matter of Garcia, which fails to establish predictability, upsets the settled expectations of parties' remanded cases and unfairly tips the scale in the government's favor, says Monica Mananzan at the Capital Area Immigrants' Rights Coalition.

• Inside Immigration Court: The Pros, Cons Of Remote Hearings

  

  Technology introduced during the pandemic has improved the quality and efficiency of virtual immigration court hearings, but concerns still linger over the court system's ability to provide full and complete simultaneous interpretation in these hearings, as well as its effect on due process, says Immigration Judge Mimi Tsankov.

• How Attorneys Can Help Combat Anti-Asian Hate

  

  Amid an exponential increase in violence against Asian American and Pacific Islander communities, unique obstacles stand in the way of accountability and justice — but lawyers can effect powerful change by raising awareness, offering legal representation, advocating for victims’ rights and more, say attorneys at Gibson Dunn.

• Well-Equipped Public Defenders Can Help Reduce Recidivism

  

  Public defenders are uniquely positioned to connect clients with essential services that are proven to address the root drivers of crime, thus reducing recidivism and promoting public safety — but they need adequate resources to bring about this change, says Emily Galvin-Almanza at Partners for Justice.

• Inside Immigration Court: Making The Case For Bond Release

  

  Immigration Judge Samuel Cole offers a guide to help attorneys practicing in immigration court — against a backdrop of high stakes and fast-moving dockets — better prepare for bond hearings, so proceedings run more smoothly and with less delay.

• LA County Should Loosen Strict Reentry Program Criteria

  

  Los Angeles County’s recent fair chance ordinance proposal is an important step toward reducing recidivism, but the county should also make its reentry programs available to all formerly incarcerated individuals and focus on prerelease job training, say Sophia Lowe, Eleanor Pearson and Samuel Mistrano at USC.

• Why Trump Sexual Abuse Verdict May Be Hard To Replicate

  

  Survivors of sexual assault may be emboldened to file suit after writer E. Jean Carroll’s trial victory against former President Donald Trump, but before assigning too much significance to the verdict, it’s worth noting that the case’s unique constellation of factors may make it the exception rather than the rule, says Jessica Roth at Cardozo School of Law.

• New Ideas For Using Litigation Finance To Close Justice Gap

  

  Bob Koneck at Woodsford outlines new ways in which the growing litigation finance industry could work with foundations, law firms and schools to address the urgent access to justice crisis.

• Meeting The Legal Aid Needs Of Human Trafficking Survivors

  

  Human trafficking survivors have a wide range of unmet legal needs, but there are several ways law firms and attorneys can provide more comprehensive and trauma-informed support, say Sarah Dohoney Byrne at Moore & Van Allen and Renata Parras at Paul Hastings.

• Broader Problems Remain After Justices' DNA Test Ruling

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision this week in Reed v. Goertz straightforwardly resolves a statute of limitations question on post-conviction DNA testing, but it does not address the underlying issue that judges remain hostile to granting access to new evidence of innocence, much less relief based on that new evidence, says Brandon Garrett at Duke University.